Guest Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 (edited) Funny you say that sasfooty since you are seeing Bigfoots wearing hats in your pictures...lol Quick picking on Sasfooty and being a general buzzkill. Did you come here to bully people? That is all you are accomplishing because your "points" are not even arguments. I vote you stop it. Edited November 12, 2011 by Kings Canyon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Thanks KC. Then clearly the evidence you claim to have is in no way compelling if you already know people are going tear it to shreds before even putting it up. Then clearly, there is no reason you should be compelled to try to nag me into posting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LissingMinx Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 chimps in hats...and socks and boots These are rescued lab chimps. Not pets raised as humans, playing dressup from infancy. They haven't been taught these behaviors. They observed humans and came up with this stuff on their own. This is just one group in one sanctuary. This is common behavior among great apes in various conditions ranging from labs to the wild. *shrug* I myself have some small reasons to believe one of our "locals" has/had a thing for eye/sunglasses. As goofy as it might sound... had to add this for the cuteness factor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thelion Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Quick picking on Sasfooty and being a general buzzkill. Did you come here to bully people? That is all you are accomplishing because your "points" are not even arguments. I vote you stop it. Im not picking on anyone bro. Sasfooty threw a sarcastic comment in response to my comment about how obviously fake the phil picture looks, all I did was respond in a sarcastic manner as well. I'm an honest person and am just seeking the truth on this subject and when we have people claiming to have many pictures but refuse to show them it raises some red flags. If you don't wanna call a bluff when you see one that's fine but I do because we need to separate the people who want the truth from the people who make this entire subject a joke to the rest of the world by making huge claims but refusing to back it up. Don't get your panties in a bunch kingscanyon no one is bullying anyone. Now be quiet before I stuff you in a locker! Haha Jk and sasfooty I hope you don't feel like I'm picking on you I'm just really interested in this subject and get a little frustrated when you say these things but flat out refuse to back it up. No hard feelings Sas! Im not picking on anyone bro. Sasfooty threw a sarcastic comment in response to my comment about how obviously fake the phil picture looks, all I did was respond in a sarcastic manner as well. I'm an honest person and am just seeking the truth on this subject and when we have people claiming to have many pictures but refuse to show them it raises some red flags. If you don't wanna call a bluff when you see one that's fine but I do because we need to separate the people who want the truth from the people who make this entire subject a joke to the rest of the world by making huge claims but refusing to back it up. Don't get your panties in a bunch kingscanyon no one is bullying anyone. Now be quiet before I stuff you in a locker! Haha Jk and sasfooty I hope you don't feel like I'm picking on you I'm just really interested in this subject and get a little frustrated when you say these things but flat out refuse to back it up. No hard feelings Sas! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Thanks Indie for posting the link with more information. The photo looks very fake and when I first saw it I thought it looked like Smokey Bear without his hat. I'm no expert and I don't know anything about the guy who took it so I won't say that it is 100% fake. I found this statement interesting: "On February 14 the trail-cam was triggered a few times during the night. It snapped a few photos, but all those images were very dark. The camera has a visible white flash, but the flash had been inadvertently disabled. Even with the flash disabled, the unit still snapped photos when triggered by motion." How does something like that seem to happen so often? On the other link I noticed it said the wife was standing 3 ft. behind where the creature was standing. Why do a comparison with a small woman at a different angle with her standing 3 ft back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisco Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I don't understand why it is so incomprehensible for some of them to be seen doing some of the things that we do. According to the DNA studies, they are, at least our close cousins. They watch us constantly, & even mimic the sounds we make. Why is it so unbelievable that they might occasionally do other things that we do? I can believe a lot of things that Bigfoot can or will do. After all, as a believer, I have already crossed the line into believing in the incredible. I have read many reports of Bigfoot using items that they find or make. Rudimentary basket weaving is commonly reported. The issue I have with them wearing hats, made out of animal hides, is that it would require a sophisticated thought process. Mostly because the hide would have to be preserved in order for it to be malleable enough to form a hat or hood. That would require tanning and that is not an easy thing to do. This is normally done by using chemicals as well as stripping and stretching the hide. I suppose that this could be done by chewing the hide and scraping it with stones. However, it would still require some type of material such as ashes and fat in order to preserve it long term. It's also possible that a Bigfoot could drape the hide of a recent kill on it's head but it would not last for more than a day or two, before it stiffened and dried. I'm a hunter and, in my younger says, hunted for trophies. I skinned and caped my fair share of animals and it's not easy to skin any kind of game. It requires patience, a very sharp knife, as well as dexterity and strength. In order for Bigfoot to skin and animal in such a way that the head was intact, it would require tools, planning and the ability to learn and teach. This is a skill that would not be randomly learned. It would have to be passed down from an elder. Is it possible? As I mentioned, when it comes to Bigfoot, anything is possible by virtue that it has not been proven to be real. However, if Bigfoot is capable of making clothes, then it would be capable of doing just about anything.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I can believe a lot of things that Bigfoot can or will do. After all, as a believer, I have already crossed the line into believing in the incredible. I have read many reports of Bigfoot using items that they find or make. Rudimentary basket weaving is commonly reported. The issue I have with them wearing hats, made out of animal hides, is that it would require a sophisticated thought process. Mostly because the hide would have to be preserved in order for it to be malleable enough to form a hat or hood. That would require tanning and that is not an easy thing to do. This is normally done by using chemicals as well as stripping and stretching the hide. I suppose that this could be done by chewing the hide and scraping it with stones. However, it would still require some type of material such as ashes and fat in order to preserve it long term. It's also possible that a Bigfoot could drape the hide of a recent kill on it's head but it would not last for more than a day or two, before it stiffened and dried. I'm a hunter and, in my younger says, hunted for trophies. I skinned and caped my fair share of animals and it's not easy to skin any kind of game. It requires patience, a very sharp knife, as well as dexterity and strength. In order for Bigfoot to skin and animal in such a way that the head was intact, it would require tools, planning and the ability to learn and teach. This is a skill that would not be randomly learned. It would have to be passed down from an elder. Is it possible? As I mentioned, when it comes to Bigfoot, anything is possible by virtue that it has not been proven to be real. However, if Bigfoot is capable of making clothes, then it would be capable of doing just about anything.... I completely see what you're saying, I don't know though, maybe he just stole it from someone's porch?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisco Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Quick picking on Sasfooty and being a general buzzkill. Did you come here to bully people? That is all you are accomplishing because your "points" are not even arguments. I vote you stop it. I'm not picking sides here but this is a perfect example of the topic in discussion. I know nothing about the photos Sasfooty has of a Bigfoot wearing a hat. However, it is a very unusual claim. True or not, a claim like this will attract questions. It's not, in any way, unreasonable to ask for verification when the claim is founded on photographic evidence. If Sasfooty had said that she witnessed a Bigfoot wearing a hat. Then, we would just choose to believe or not to believe her story. However, that's not what's going on here. Her claim is that she has a photo of a Bigfoot wearing a hat. That changes things quite a bit. Simply because she has the ability to make a claim and, more importantly, substantiate that claim with proof. Common sense dictates that by just saying that she has seen a Bigfoot wearing a hat, her purpose is to inform us and her desire is to be believed. If not, she would have kept that information to herself. Therefor, if she had a photo, it would only add credence to her story. By refusing to show it to us; we have to question why? Her answer is that she dose not want to deal with scrutiny and criticism. That's all we need to know about the photo. If the photo was crystal clear and you could see detail, it would not be torn to pieces. I'm sure there would still be some skeptics but there are and there will always be people that will disagree with anything. Therefor, the logical reason she has not shared the photo is because it does not clearly and unequivocally show a Bigfoot wearing a hat. Just my opinion....of course. I completely see what you're saying, I don't know though, maybe he just stole it from someone's porch?? The simplest answer is always the best. Excellent point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 She won't release the pics guys. KC claims some too, but won't release. Might as well quit trying to get them to. I would think maybe bones, pics of prints, and maybe a tooth would be held and people not release them. Video would be the most rare artifact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Cisco, I have no way of knowing where he may have gotten the cougar hat. There are some accounts around of the Sasquatch people trading & exchanging gifts with NA's & that could be a possible answer. They don't tell much if anything about their private ceremonies, but I have heard that occasionally Sasquatches attend some of them. It isn't unrealistic to think that it might have been a gift or that he may have traded for it. As for being made by them...from what I have observed, they have plenty of intelligence to make one themselves. Ashes, fat, & animal brains would all be readily available to them. They certainly have the teeth for chewing the hide if they wanted to. People leave tools lying around, too, & it would be no problem for them to acquire a knife or just about anything else they might want. The cougar face looks a little crooked & kind of wrinkled, not like a taxidermied head. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LissingMinx Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 the cougar "hat" Sas says she saw could have been any number of things. From a fresh killed animal simply draped over its head, perhaps as a show of prowess, to some old stuffed animal found in a garbage dump and in common great ape fashion, draped over its head. I do not believe she said it was a finely made, tanned hide, stitched hat made from a cougar. She said it appeared to have a cougar draped over its head like some kind of hat. There is a difference. This kind of word twisting is why I generally avoid sharing my own experiences. I don't mind terribly when I have to eat my own words, but I will not eat someone else's. Don't try to shove them into my mouth, ya know? I haven't seen the pic, nor have I questioned her for details that might narrow the possible explanations but seeing one with an apparent big cat draped over its head is, in itself, not that far out. Just amusing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Maybe all you have is a pic of a cougar sitting on a stump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 No. There is no doubt about what is under the cougar. He shows up a lot better than his hat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 The phil pics are 100% fake,and easly proven . I don't know how to post the pics the way I want, but if you take the 2 photos, bigphil and carol, and open them in a photo app , zoom in so they are around the same size, and go back and forth viewing them, or put the 2 pics in a slideshow set to the fastest setting. you can see that many details in the photos do not match,like the post of the building on the right are different distances from the tree, the building on the left shows boxes in , phil pic,there are no boxes in the carol pic, just for starters, and there are many more. they don't look like pictures more like artwork. soon as you compare them it is so easy to spot the differences, and there is no way to argue that they are real. These are a BUST ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 She won't release the pics guys. KC claims some too, but won't release. Might as well quit trying to get them to. I would think maybe bones, pics of prints, and maybe a tooth would be held and people not release them. Video would be the most rare artifact. Right, but as much as she refuses to show the pictures, she has no problem bringing them up and talking about how great they are, and making sure we all know she has them and we can't see them. Even just a few posts back- "there's no doubt what's under the cougar hat, he shows up better than the hat"... well great. It's a very clear, unmistakable picture of a bigfoot; thanks for waving it in front of our face. I understand the part about not wanting to be subjected to ridicule and have her pics torn to pieces. Really, I get that. However, if it was me and I felt that way, what good would it do to make it known that I have the pictures at all? What purpose could that possibly serve other than the fact that the obvious response is "cool, can we see them?" to which I'm gonna say, "nope, just for me! Na na!" There's only one reason to do that and it's fairly transparent to me. If you have good pictures, share them with the community of people who will appreciate them. If you are unwilling to share them, then don't talk about them in every thread like it's common knowledge that they exist and they are excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts